Ash Kelley

Like it would have got like totally obscured and other things.

In fact, in the week that followed Kitty's death, the murder made the paper a handful of times reporting basic facts.

Then came Martin Gansberg's now notorious New York Times article that changed the narrative entirely.

published on March 27, 1964, Gainsbourg's article, 37 Who Saw Murder Didn't Call the Police, ignored most of the facts of Kitty's murder and instead focused on a misunderstanding of the reactions from her neighbors.

He wrote, According to him, Kitty's neighbors not only heard her cries for help, but actively ignored them, knowing that she was being violently assaulted.

He said, if we had been called when he first attacked, the woman might not be dead now.

That's he had quoted a police chief as saying that.

It seems unlikely that Martin Ginsburg was acting like in bad faith when he wrote the article.

Instead, the article was assigned to him by an editor, Abe Rosenthal, who had been fed the misinformation by New York City Police Commissioner Michael Murphy.

So this is not like one guy who just made shit up.

It's a game of telephone.

It's a game of telephone, but it was misinformation that was given.

Yeah.

And then spewed out.

Right.

It's not.

Like they're trying to say the bystander effect is not real.

Exactly.

Now, in reality, no one saw Kitty getting attacked the second time.

Right, because they wouldn't have been able to.